portainer_networks_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions default behavior for endpoint_id and that name_filter is a server-side Docker filter, which is good. However, it does not disclose pagination, error states, or any limitations like return format or access restrictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very concise: a one-line purpose followed by two lines for each parameter. It is well-structured and front-loaded, with no redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the arguments adequately but lacks broader context such as error handling, authentication requirements, whether the result is filtered by user permissions, or any prerequisites for the endpoint. Given the simplicity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, it is somewhat complete but could be improved.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains both parameters: endpoint_id's usage and default, and name_filter's substring filtering and server-side nature. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type and title.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('Docker networks') along with the scope ('on an endpoint'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like portainer_network_inspect or portainer_network_create.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as inspecting a single network or creating one. The description does not mention exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.